Legal Writing and Research Commons^™

Medical-Legal Partnerships In Smaller Communities- Symposium Panel, Doug Mefford, Charleyn Reviere, David Clay

Belmont Health Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Other Bar Hurdle: An Examination Of The Character And Fitness Requirement For Bar Admission, David L. Hudson Jr., Andrea Gemignani

Law Faculty Scholarship

In The Other Bar Hurdle, published in the Mitchell Hamline Law Review, the authors examine the character and fitness requirement as a critical yet under-scrutinized component of attorney licensing. The Article surveys the historical foundations, purposes, and contemporary administration of character and fitness investigations, highlighting their dual aims of protecting the public and safeguarding the integrity of the courts. It then synthesizes extensive scholarly criticism, focusing on concerns about discriminatory origins, lack of transparency, inconsistent application, deterrent effects on prospective applicants, and the disproportionate impact on individuals with criminal records, financial hardship, or mental health histories. While acknowledging …

Essay: A Continuing Constitutional Trend Of Using The First To Interpret The Second, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

This Essay examines the continuing constitutional trend of using First Amendment principles to interpret and develop Second Amendment doctrine. Beginning with District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Supreme Court drew multiple analogies between the two amendments, the article traces how lower courts have relied on First Amendment jurisprudence to structure Second Amendment analysis. Courts have borrowed concepts such as the non-absolute nature of constitutional rights, the role of history and tradition, categorical exclusions, tiered standards of scrutiny, adequate alternatives, evidentiary requirements, and doctrines relating to fees, underinclusivity, and geographic limitations. At the same time, courts have rejected …

Parole In Place As A Solution For The Immigration Status Of Immediate Relatives Of U.S. Citizens, Maximiliano Gluzman

Law Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the structural barriers that prevent many undocumented immigrants—particularly immediate relatives of U.S. citizens—from adjusting their immigration status under current U.S. immigration law. It focuses on the interaction between the Immigration and Nationality Act’s adjustment-of-status requirement that applicants be “inspected and admitted or paroled” and the unlawful presence provisions enacted by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. Together, these rules create a dilemma for many noncitizens who entered the United States without inspection but later become eligible for lawful permanent residence through family petitions: leaving the United States to pursue consular processing triggers the three- or …

Plausible Retaliation: Using Modern Pleading Standards As A Blueprint For First Amendment Retaliation Claims, Amy L. Moore

Law Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the Supreme Court’s evolving doctrine governing First Amendment retaliatory arrest claims, focusing on the Court’s decision in Nieves v. Bartlett and its imposition of a lack-of-probable-cause requirement as a threshold element. Tracing the doctrinal development from Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle through Hartman v. Moore, Reichle v. Howards, Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, and Nieves, the Article argues that the Court improperly imported retaliatory prosecution logic into the arrest context without adequately accounting for modern pleading standards under Twombly and Iqbal. The Article contends that requiring …

Do Courts Have Jurisdiction To Consider Questions Of Fact To Determine Whether A Noncitizen Is Entitled To Eligibility For Discretionary Relief From Removal?, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article previews Patel v. Garland, a United States Supreme Court case addressing the scope of federal court jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), as amended by the REAL ID Act. The central question is whether federal courts retain jurisdiction to review nondiscretionary factual determinations underlying eligibility for discretionary relief from removal, or whether the statute’s bar on reviewing “any judgment” precludes judicial review of such threshold findings. The case arises from the denial of adjustment of status to Pankajkumar Patel, deemed inadmissible for allegedly falsely representing himself as a U.S. citizen on a driver’s license application. Both petitioner …

Does A State Violate Rluipa By Prohibiting An Inmate's Pastor From Laying Hands On Him And Audibly Praying During The Execution Process?, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article examines Ramirez v. Collier, a United States Supreme Court case addressing the scope of religious liberty protections afforded to death-row inmates under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). The case centers on whether Texas prison officials violate RLUIPA by prohibiting an inmate’s pastor from laying hands on him and praying audibly during the execution process. The dispute requires the Court to evaluate (1) whether such prohibitions substantially burden sincerely held religious beliefs, (2) whether the state satisfies RLUIPA’s strict scrutiny standard by demonstrating a compelling governmental interest advanced through the least restrictive …

A Telehealth Explosion: Using Lessons From The Pandemic To Shape The Future Of Telehealth Regulation, Deborah R. Farringer

Law Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the dramatic expansion of telehealth during the COVID-19 public health emergency and argues that the pandemic created a unique regulatory laboratory for evaluating longstanding legal and economic barriers to telehealth adoption. Prior to COVID-19, telehealth growth was constrained by a complex web of state licensure requirements, physician–patient relationship rules, federal prescribing restrictions (including the Ryan Haight Act), Medicare geographic and originating-site limitations, and inadequate reimbursement structures. In response to the pandemic, federal and state governments issued sweeping waivers that relaxed privacy enforcement, expanded reimbursement, eased prescribing limitations, and temporarily dismantled geographic and site-of-service constraints.

Drawing on the …

The Roberts Court Its First Amendment Free Expression Jurisprudence: 2005-2021, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

This Article, Fundamental First Amendment Principles, distills the complexity of First Amendment jurisprudence into ten core principles designed to guide students, lawyers, and scholars through what is often described as a labyrinthine body of law. Recognizing that free-speech doctrine lacks a single unifying framework, the authors identify foundational commitments that structure constitutional analysis, including the protection of criticism of government, the strong prohibition against viewpoint discrimination, the safeguarding of symbolic and offensive expression, and the recognition that not all speech is protected. The Article also emphasizes doctrines protecting the right not to speak, freedom of association, and the contextual …

The Roberts Court's Theory Of Agency Accountability: A Step In The Wrong Direction, Howard Schweber

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Popular Regulation? State Constitutional Amendment And The Administrative State, Jonathan L. Marshfield

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hands Off My Timbs: An Overview Of The Methods And Misuses Of Civil Forfeiture As A Tool Of Law Enforcement, Nathaniel Sherman

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pandemic, Politics, Public Health , And The Fda, Jordan Paradise, Becky Bavlsik

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ai For Retrospective Review, Catherine M. Sharkey

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Emergencies Revisited: The Enduring Legacy Of The Police Power, Santiago Legarre

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Limits On Administrative Agencies In Cyberspace, Jon M. Garon

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Death Penalty Exceptionalism And Administrative Law, Corinna B. Lain

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Contemporary Issues In Administrative Law, Steve Darnell, Kristin Husat, Sue Sheldon

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Administrative Law Symposium Debate, Akram Faizer, Stewart Harris

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Orwell's 1984 "Big Brother" Concept And The Government Use Of Facial Recognition Technology: A Call To Action For Regulation To Protect Privacy Rights, Tate Ducker

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Keynote: The Digital Future Of Healthcare: Emerging Trends In Telehealth Technology, Professor Stacy Tovino, Dr. Davis Charles

Belmont Health Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Panel: Telehealth Legal Considerations, Travis Lloyd, Nathan Kottkamp, Nesrin Tift

Belmont Health Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Student Note: The Nfl And Opioid Abuse: Choosing The Best Route To Tackle A Difficult Problem, Jacob Freeland

Belmont Health Law Journal

Based on current precedent, legal relief is not a viable solution to remedy the NFL’s ongoing substance abuse issues. However, the long-term safety of current and future football players, as well as the integrity of the sport, can be saved if instead of resorting to the courts, the players take this battle to state and federal legislatures while simultaneously promoting cultural awareness of the dangers that these prescription practices pose to past, current, and future football players. Part II of this note will examine the relevant legal and procedural history of opioid-related lawsuits that have been filed against the NFL …

Student Note: To Err Is Human, Unless You Are A Healthcare Provider, Jorie Zajicek

Belmont Health Law Journal

This note will explore the rise of criminal prosecutions of health care providers for medical errors, absent any intent to harm.46 This note will demonstrate that in the interest of patient safety and error prevention, there are alternative forms of punishment, other than criminal prosecution, that are better suited to address medical errors when there is no intent to do harm. Part II of this note lays out mechanisms currently in place to address medical errors. Part III attempts to address why some cases are criminally prosecuted by analyzing specific cases. Next, Part IV explores arguments for and against criminal …

Bridges To Judicial History, Alberto R. Gonzales

Law Faculty Scholarship

In Bridges to Judicial History, Alberto R. Gonzales reflects on the enduring legacy of Judge Reynaldo Guerra Garza and Justice Raul A. Gonzalez, Jr., two pioneering Mexican American jurists whose careers transformed the landscape of the Texas and federal judiciaries. Tracing their shared roots in South Texas and their rise from modest beginnings, the article situates both men as institutional “bridges” between cultures, generations, and eras of legal opportunity. Garza’s historic appointments as the first Mexican American federal district judge and later the first Mexican American on a federal circuit court, along with Gonzalez’s service as the first Hispanic …

Student Note: Finding A Cure To Gun Violence: How Improving America's Mental Health System Could Prevent Future Gun Violence, Paige Goodwin

Belmont Health Law Journal

This Note will demonstrate how gun control legislation aimed at individuals with mental illnesses has been politically untenable and ineffective at preventing incidents of gun violence. Section II of this Note will introduce the history of both federal and state laws regulating gun control, highlighting those targeting individuals with mental health issues and examining major flaws in the legislation that undermines the federal background check system.

Next, Section III will explain why existing gun legislation is unworkable and ineffective, specifically addressing the discrepancies between various state and federal laws and the barriers to mental health treatment that further hinder gun …

Contemporary Issues In Administrative Law, Amy L. Moore

Law Faculty Scholarship

This symposium panel discussion, published in the Belmont Law Review, examines contemporary issues in Tennessee administrative law through the perspectives of an administrative law judge, a state agency general counsel, and an attorney from the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office

8BelmontLRev581 . The panel explores the evolving scope of judicial review, statutory deference to agency decision-making under the Tennessee Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA), and the practical implications of recent legislative changes expanding venue for judicial review. Panelists analyze the mechanics and challenges of state rulemaking, including executive oversight, Attorney General review for legality and constitutionality, legislative approval through the …

The Supreme Court's Worst Decision In Recent Years--Garcetti V. Ceballos, The Dred Scott Decision For Public Employees, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

The United States Supreme Court decision of Garcetti v. Ceballos deserves its rightful place in the Court’s hall of shame. In Garcetti, the Court issued a decision that serves as a Dred Scott-type ruling for public employees, diminishing their free speech rights to an unacceptable level. The Court created a categorical rule that public employees have no free speech rights when engaged in official, job-related speech.

Under Garcetti, it does not matter how valuable an employee’s speech is, how much corruption that speech exposes, or whether the speech informs the public regarding an important issue. Instead, the five-justice majority focused …

The Art Of The Matter: A Linguistic Analysis Of Public Art Policy In Confederate Monument Removal Case Law, Kristi Arth

Law Faculty Scholarship

In the wake of such tragedies as the Charleston, South Carolina mass shooting, the deadly Unite the Right Rally, and the death of George Floyd, various communities have engaged in efforts to remove Confederate monuments from public spaces. These removal efforts frequently result in litigation focused on ownership rights, government speech, and other claims. This article asks what responsibility the judiciary and litigants have to acknowledge that Confederate monuments—for better or for worse—are creations of public art.
/="/">
/="/">Whether the monuments stay or go at the end of a given lawsuit, the outcome affects the public art policy of …

Drunk Drivers Are A Moving Time Bomb: Should States Impose Liability On Both Social Hosts And Commercial Establishments Whose Intoxicated Guests And Patrons Subsequently Cause Injuries Or Death To Innocent Third Parties, Tracey B. Carter

Law Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines whether states should impose civil liability not only on commercial alcohol vendors under dram shop statutes, but also on social hosts whose intoxicated guests subsequently cause injury or death to innocent third parties. Drawing upon national drunk-driving statistics, historical development of dram shop laws, and comparative analysis of state approaches—particularly in Southeastern jurisdictions—the Article evaluates the effectiveness and limitations of existing liability frameworks. While most states recognize statutory liability for commercial establishments that serve visibly intoxicated persons or minors, many decline to extend comparable liability to social hosts serving adult guests. The Article analyzes the policy arguments …